Santosh Bahadur vs State Of Tripura And Ors

Heard Ms. P. Purakayastha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as Mr. Biswanath Majumder, learned CGC appearing for the respondent No.3 and Mr. S.S. Debnath, learned counsel appearing for the respondents No.1 & 2.

This court is confronted with a controversy which is unusual in nature. The petitioner has been a sub-jailor in the year 1986 and he was promoted to the post of jailor on 30.04.2002 and subsequently to the post of Deputy Superintendent on 20.04.2008. He joined in Kendriya Sanshodhanagar on 31.03.2016 as the Superintendent in charge. On 31.07.2017, the petitioner had retired from service at the age of 60 years, after serving a long tenure sparing for more than 31 years. The petitioner was selected for President's Correctional Service Medal in the eve of Independence Day, 2015. The petitioner had received barrage of congratulation for such achievement and recognition. On 15.08.2015, the petitioner was awarded with Gold medal but as the medal was not prepared formally, such medal was not handed down to the petitioner. On 11.09.2015, the under Secretary to the Government of India had directed the General Manager, India Government Mint, Alipore, Kolkata to prepare the medals and to send the same directly to the respective State Governments after engraving the names of the award winners. On 05.11.2015 the under Secretary to the Government of India by his letter dated 05.11.2015 had asked the respondent No.2 to collect the President Scrolls in respect of Correctional Medal for Meritorious service in respect of the awardees, one of whom is the petitioner. In a much later stage, the respondent No.2 authorized the petitioner to collect his medal and accordingly on 23.09.2016, the Additional Secretary & Inspector General of Police, Tripura by his letter dated 23.09.2016 written to Sri Rajnish Kwatra, under Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, CS Division, Government of India informed that the petitioner had been authorized to collect the medals. On 03.10.2016 the petitioner had visited India Government Mint. Kolkata for collecting the medals, as had been authorized by the respondent No.2, but he was informed that the said medal would not be handed over. After his return, the petitioner had informed the entire matter to the respondent No.2 and made request to make necessary arrangement to bring his medal as he was then almost on the verge of his retirement. On 31.07.2017, the petitioner had retired and thereafter also, he had persuaded for collection of the said medal. But the medal is yet to be handed down to the petitioner.

Now, by means of this writ petition, the petitioner has urged this court to direct the respondents to collect and hand down the said President's Correctional Service Medal. The respondents No.1 and 2 have filed their reply and stated that the petitioner had been facing a departmental proceeding, initiated by the memorandum dated 13.10.2017 on the charge of gross negligence. For such negligence, one life convict prisoner could manage to escape from the Kendriya Sanshodhanagar, Bishalgarh on 21.10.2016. A letter has been written to the under Secretary, MHA (C.S. Division), Government of India on 31.01.2017. In the departmental proceeding, the petitioner had been awarded penalty of reduction of pension by 7.5% for a period of three years from the date of his superannuation. On 23.03.2018, by a letter addressed to the under Secretary to the Ministry of Home Affairs, C.S. Division, Government of India the respondents had desired to know whether for reason that, the petitioner had been punished in a disciplinary authority, could he still retain the President's Correctional Service Medal or not. The said communication has not been responded to by the Ministry of Home Affairs as yet. But the petitioner did not receive the said medal.

There is no dispute that the petitioner was given the penalty of reduction of pension by 7.5% for a period of three years from the date of superannuation and no other penalty whatsoever had been awarded upon him.

Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties the only question that surfaces for response is that whether the delivery of President's Correctional Service Medal can be withheld for the said departmental proceeding and for its culmination to penalty. Unless such penalty is given or unless any rule authorizes the respondents to recall the President's Correctional Service Medal from the petitioner, the respondents cannot withhold the delivery of the President's Correctional Service Medal in as much as the said service Medal had been conferred on him. Hence, the respondents are directed to hand down President's Correctional Service Medal to the petitioner within a period of one month from the day when a copy of this order will be served on the respondents.

Mr. B. Majumder, learned CGC appearing for the respondent No.3 has categorically stated that withdrawal or forfeiture of the President's Correctional Service Medal is guided by certain guidelines which are incorporated in the circular No.11026/02/2017-PMA dated 29.05.2017 [Annexure-R/7 to the reply filed by the respondents]. From the notification dated 29.05.2017 [Annexure-R/7 to the reply filed by them] it appears that the recommendation for the withdrawal can be made as per Rule as provided under Annexure-3 to the said letter dated 16.02.2010. No order or recommendation is available in the records to show that the petitioners President's Correctional Service Medal has been sought to be taken away on the ground of his proven mis-conduct and accordingly, this court has taken the view which is inconsistent with Annexure-3, contending the guidelines detailing the procedure of withdrawal of the medal. It clearly provides three circumstances. viz.

(i) if the awardee is convicted by any court of law for such an act or conduct involving moral turpitude which brings the Police Force into disrepute;

(ii) the awardee is dismissed from the service for such an act or conduct which brings the Police Force into disrepute;

(iii) Any other act/conduct of the awardee which is specifically not covered under (i) and (ii) nevertheless attracts the provisions of Rule 6 of the President's Police Medal Rules and Rule 8 of the Police Medal Rules on the ground of disloyalty, cowardice in action or such conduct as in the opinion of the President, brings the force into disrepute.

None of the circumstances has been made out by the respondents. Therefore, there is no ground for withdrawal of the President's Correctional Service Medal.

Mr. Majumder, learned CGC has further submitted that the medal has been collected by an employee of Tripura Bhawan, New Delhi, as it appears from the communication dated 09.04.2018 [Annexure-R/3 to the reply filed by the respondent No.3] that one Suresh Singh had collected the President's Correctional Service Medal for meritorious service on Independence Day, 2015. His identity has been established through the official I-Card issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs. It appears that the President's Correctional Service Medal is in the custody of the respondents No.1 and 2 but they have not brought the said medal to Tripura.

Under this circumstances as narrated above, this court is of the further view that the respondents No.1 and 2 shall hold the responsibility of bring the said medal and to give away the said medal to the petitioner within a month, as stipulated above.

In terms of the above, this petition stands allowed.

There shall be no order as to costs.

A copy of this order be supplied to the counsel for the parties.